Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

To Sign or not to Sign - Bridgewater vs Draft. DRAFT


CPcavedweller
 Share

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The mediocre QB was the difference between 5-11 and competing for a playoff berth last year.

Really you have no idea what this team would have looked like with a more risk taking QB.  Most likely wouldn't have been in many of those situations in the first place.  You can't just play Teddy for 3 quarters then insert another QB for different situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Hate to tell you, but there's a reason for that. 

Yeah, injury. Teddy was always on the... gossamer side! That's an obvious knock, but to suggest that it was anything more than injury is being disingenuous. Teddy had more than one suitor last offseason. I was just miffed that he got a two-year prove-it deal as opposed to the traditional one-year.

Edited by top dawg
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jfra78 said:

Really you have no idea what this team would have looked like with a more risk taking QB.  Most likely wouldn't have been in many of those situations in the first place.  You can't just play Teddy for 3 quarters then insert another QB for different situations.

The thing is, Teddy was billed as someone that would always take care of the ball, yet his int % doesn't show that to be the case.  He may not want to take risks, but he sure isn't making the best decisions all the time, either.

I would love last year to just be an unfortunate blip and for him to become a franchise guy for us this year, just don't see it as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

The thing is, Teddy was billed as someone that would always take care of the ball, yet his int % doesn't show that to be the case.  He may not want to take risks, but he sure isn't making the best decisions all the time, either.

I would love last year to just be an unfortunate blip and for him to become a franchise guy for us this year, just don't see it as possible.

Exactly! He certainly wasn't as advertised in the ball security department, which is the second biggest reason I want to move on from him.

Edited by top dawg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mav1234 said:

The thing is, Teddy was billed as someone that would always take care of the ball, yet his int % doesn't show that to be the case.  He may not want to take risks, but he sure isn't making the best decisions all the time, either.

I would love last year to just be an unfortunate blip and for him to become a franchise guy for us this year, just don't see it as possible.

His interceptions went up later in the season when he was pressured to win games and not play his style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jfra78 said:

His interceptions went up later in the season when he was pressured to win games and not play his style.

His job is to win games, if having to lead 4th quarter comebacks or game-winning drives is too much pressure, what is he good for? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, top dawg said:

All of us would prefer Teddy not be the starter! Don't get it twisted!

I get that sense from you and other posters but that one in particular must be a relative or in teddy's circle or something.

I am not thrilled with the possibility of another season of Teddy starting but I'm not saying he's the worst quarterback we've ever had either. That being said I also not wwilling to deal in self deception. If someone isn't clutch and not franchise starter quality you just have to accept it. Sitting around making excuses is just more of the same. They didn't fly for the last two long term starters we had and they won't now. It is a perfomance based business and about money at the end of the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jfra78 said:

Give teddy a true red zone threat and a defense that is able to make at least 2 stops a game and he can win games

 

ok, so Teddy can't win the game but if you put a star cast around him, maybe he won't lose the game? heh

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather see what Minshew or Darnold can do, but only at the cost of a third-rounder or later, with the emphasis on "later". It all depends on the market, which has gotten a little crazy as of late. If the market demands something higher (which I can see in the case of Darnold), I'd likely balk.

Edited by top dawg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Today, we are all Kucci... I miss our feral Russian attack goalie!
    • That was a good segment. Watched every minute of it and would highly recommend it to all fans.
    • "So much of what the Panthers are going to do next week isn't dictated by their preference, but by what happens above them. That's another benefit of not getting locked into need. For instance, if you're thinking you want a receiver, seeing five or six of them go off the board and reacting by taking the sixth or seventh off your list instead of the first (or second or third) something else isn't necessarily wise." https://www.panthers.com/news/ask-the-old-guy-back-into-the-weeds-of-the-nfl-draft-bryce-young-charlotte-hornets-mock-draft This is what some don't seem to get, I don't care how many times it is said: You're NOT going to draft an inferior person at one position, just because that position is perceived as, or is in fact, a bigger need. That would basically nullify, or at least lessen, the reason why you set yourself up via free agency to be able to take the BPA/BAP on the board in the first place.  Yes, the process is complex, very much involved and ongoing, but the overall philosophy is not rocket science. You set yourself up in order not to be pigeonholed into taking a lower graded player at the expense of a higher graded one. This is why Morgan, Gantt and countless of others say the same thing. This is why it's just nonsensical to set yourself in a position where you don't have to, but then act like you have to come hell or high water: "Oh, we have to draft [whatever position], and we can't draft [this position]."  I'm good with whatever they do, until proven otherwise, but even then, you have to be mature enough to know that drafting is an imperfect exercise, filled with hits and misses. And, you generally don't know if you've hit, and especially missed, right away. Moreover, like I've said before, sometimes two players--different positions or not--can both be hits on their respective teams, so in that sense, it's not purely about a right or wrong pick as much as it's about putting puzzle pieces together at the time the best way that you know how.  At the end of the day, people are going to believe what they want to believe, but one thing that's true is that what the Panthers do regarding the draft is dependent upon what others do, and what others do can and does change things. That being the case, it's just another reason why you can't go in with tunnel vision. The thought of doing that is preposterous.
×
×
  • Create New...